Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    Aviles was a way better fielding SS than Scutaro would have been at SS in 2012. Maybe by the about the same difference between Iggy and Drew this year.

    Aviles also hit about as well as Scutaro in 2012.

    Cody Ross was one of our best hitters in 2012. We daon't sign him if we keep Scoot. We'd have DMac all year. No Shopp, instead maybe Butler or Lava. No Padilla- maybe Bard stays up all year. Sound better now?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    The reason this thread is here is that geo hates S. Drew.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to georom4's comment:

     hetch, did papi need at bats in the minors? was it good for bard? how about all those times we sent reddick/nava up and down like a yoyo? iggy and jb need to be on the big league roster and play here - even if its not every game - i totally disagree with the idea that players at this talent level need to get their everyday swings in the minors and that translates into mlb readiness...it doesnt...you know what translates into mlb readiness? mlb playing time.....



    So you're kind of thinking we don't need a minor league?  That maybe just promote Swihart, Cecchini, Merrero, etc?

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'll repeat it one more time slowly. Scutro.....was....no....longer...a.....shortstop. Please refer to the record book to see what position he played the majority of his games in 2012: second....base. Got it?

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/scutama01-field.shtml

    [/QUOTE

    yea Ok, like he couldnt play shortstop if we needed him to....thats like saying napoli is no longer a catcher...its where they choose to play him(AVILES???)...obviously he's no spring chicken anymore...but still better than drewII

    and like Gomes is a good outfielder????? what has morteson done to even compare with scutaro since the swap? Mort will be off the team soon enough when we are at full pitching strength



    Ah, I see why you have this misconception of Scutaro as a viable short-stop.  Its not about him aging or him being a less-than-elite- shortstop georom.  Its that his history of shoulder problems caught up with him by 2012 and he really couldn't make that throw from shortstop on a consistent basis.  It is an rag-arm-related move.  You don't have to take my word for it, but maybe you can take the word of the Red Sox and Giants baseball and medical staffs.  

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    I see a lot of discussion about the Scutaro trade here, and we could go back and forth on that all day; questioning the merits or wisdom of the deal is a perfectly valid viewpoint. However, the thread is about why Mortensen should be gotten rid of, and I've yet to see Geo provide a reason for this other than that he was traded for Scutaro, who Geo believes should not have been traded. So, a year later, Ben should show his repentance by dumping Mortensen, a young, dirt cheap pitcher who has proven quite effective during his time here. Classic Georom.

    Look, I don't think Mortensen is a very big deal or going to make or break the team, but I'll defend him here because I hate seeing any of our players subjected to these kinds of ignorant, fact-free drive-bys.

    (Not even getting into the Drew stuff, because that debate has been had to death.)

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     And now, we are witness to the unfolding of his first gambit.

    Be specific on "first gambit".

     

    There is truth and fiction. There is no such thing as "not completely true".

    The first round of a 4 round competition hasn't been completed. After 3 rounds, the moving picture will start to reveal the character of the competition. Last season ended with management pulling an early plug and sweeping two embarrassing mistakes under the rug. This season, while the accounts payable declined in the aggregate, the payroll continues to be massive, due to contracts to S. Drew and Shane. S. Drew continues to be what he's been for years, a weak defensive SS with a weak bat in a home venue that should enhance the plate slash numbers for a veteran playe rin his early 30's. While S. Drew's OBP and OPS numbers have to go up, they almost can't go down, he was paid premium market to slug at an elite for a MLB SS plate work level, not to defend. 

    Shane's on the early shelf, which is why he was a cast off from his last two job hops.

    I'm glad the Red Sox finally got it right on the one year 5M base deal on damaged goods, Napoli.

    S. Drew was a pointless move of incompetence, despite claims of excuses about not know if someone would be ready. S. Drew's not ready, by that measure, from his last years. Ciriaco and Iglesias were patently ready to provide top value for the SS slot, unless you are a management that despeartely seeks slugging from the SS slot.

    This team has moved through the unbalanced early part of the season and has produced a lot of euphoria and early calls on the season long and beyond winning percentage trajectory. Only when the competition goes deeper into the schedule will it beome clear where this team's stature is in relation to the better teams in the competition. Houston doesn't overshadow KC and Baltimore.

    This marathon has teams with veterans, like the Yankees, who are nothing resembling what they will be like in the last half.

    This Red Sox team has the same issue it's had for many years. It reamins to be seen if Ortiz can be produce over a full season of workload. Napoli most certainly can't be more than a producer at a 75% workload of a full season (About 110 to 120 games).

    Unless Middlebrooks, still getting experience and adjusting to his first attempt to produce over a full 140 plus game workload, is slugging at a high level, this team would then have a weakness that will be exposed over a full season.

    I know, for a fact, that management, for the league and home venue, doesn't appropriately weight the impact that total team defense and middle of the order slugging. It fails to understand the impact that defense has on the starting pitching performance (see approach to contracts and playing time allocation at SS and catcher). 

    At this point, evaluating management's performance is a meaningless act which will be eclipsed by the evaluation that will take place at the end of 162 regular season games played, and any playoff games played.  



    Agreed, fully.  Hence, my wording:  witnessing the unfolding.  This is a story in the telling, no happy ending in April.  My only suggestion was that, gleaning what we can from this interesting opening chapter of 2013, the ending might just be different than the one yourself and others have been most emphatically insisting upon.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    I haven't insisted on any particular ending. I've stated that this team, as currently constructed, is not a title contender (competing isn't contending) and is a team that, if it qualifies for the playoffs, it will barely qualify. Two different issues, as some teams that barely qualify are still title contenders. The Red Sox, as currently constructed, will not be one. I hope changes are made or my probability based projections are wrong. 

    The issue I have, and it's well founded, is that, if managment is doing a competent job, this team should be a title contender virtually ever season it finished near the top in spending on labor ("every year" allows for confluence of long term injuries to younger players).   

     

    A gambit denotes a sacrifical move made to force a response to achieve an end plan. I don't see any managment gambit on April 30, 2013, or in the recent years before.

     

     



    You are insisting on the ending in this very post:  non-contender with the best possible ending being barely qualifying for the playoffs with no chance of contention.

    I wouldn't deny there is the disctinct possibility of this playing out just so.

    However, taking what I can from Chapter 1: April, I can also see a different ending being plausible:  team stays relatively healthy, qualifies for the post season, and with the formidable 1-2 punch of Lester/Buchholz, a solid bullpen, and a line-up that can hurt you in many different ways, a chance to compete in any 7 game series.

    I am not basing my alternate ending on any personal deep knowledge.  Just what I have seen in April, for whatever April is worth.  In past years, there has been much admonition on those who say "well, its just April".  The cry goes up "Games in April count!"  Yes, they do.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from angeroo. Show angeroo's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    How can anyone logically nitpick Ben's signings?  When they happened I have to admit I wasn't too excited (Victorino, Drew, Nap's first deal).  But I gotta say, they seem to be working out.  Fixing the clubhouse was one of his goals and he seems to have nailed it.  All these guys he brought in are pro's with no drama who just want to win.  This is a LIKEABLE team.  Haven't been able to say that in a couple years

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from illinoisredsox. Show illinoisredsox's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to ConanObrien's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    The reason this thread is here is that geo hates S. Drew.

     




     

     

     

    spot on




    Actually, the whole reason for the thread is that geo hates J.D. Drew and can't get past the last name.

     

    Was it the right signing?  Heck if I know.  Let's see in about 5 months.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    I'm glad the Red Sox finally got it right on the one year 5M base deal on damaged goods, Napoli.

    Got it right? He's been hurt more than Shane, but because he's made it one month, it's OK?

    My bet is, when he goes on the DL, you'll be saying you told us so.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    I haven't insisted on any particular ending. I've stated that this team, as currently constructed, is not a title contender (competing isn't contending) and is a team that, if it qualifies for the playoffs, it will barely qualify. Two different issues, as some teams that barely qualify are still title contenders. The Red Sox, as currently constructed, will not be one. I hope changes are made or my probability based projections are wrong. 

    The issue I have, and it's well founded, is that, if managment is doing a competent job, this team should be a title contender virtually ever season it finished near the top in spending on labor ("every year" allows for confluence of long term injuries to younger players).   

     

    A gambit denotes a sacrifical move made to force a response to achieve an end plan. I don't see any managment gambit on April 30, 2013, or in the recent years before.

     

     



    The Dodger trade.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    Hard to make a rational argument at this point that Ben C has messed up very much.  Theo is far more responsible for last year's disaster, but Ben C made the big deal with the Dodgers and then made some pretty astute offseason deals.  And so far the best thing he has done seems to be getting a good manager, especially for this team. 

    As moonslav and a lot of others have pointed out, this team is thriving on a surprisingly good rotation, a decent bullpen, good defense, and timely hitting.  The much-maligned Drew, for example, has just 6 rbi's in April, but 5 of them came in his last 4 games, which suggest he might be turning a corner.  He has made 1 error in 15 games at SS and he has decent range.  I'm also a big Iglesias fan, but right now I'm dealing with the misery of Drew at SS and the Sox at 18-7. 

    Victorino is out, but it hasn't hurt so far because guys like Nava and Carp have surprised us--to say nothing of the incomparable DAvid Ortiz. 

    You need to read softlaw carefully to pick up the nuances.  When he is comfortable his dire predictions are coming true and obvious to everyone, he is incorrigible and attacks everyone on the team.  When he senses the team might actually be decent, he moves to "well, it's only April."  And he has already prepared his next fallback position on condemning the FO, which is to argue, "well, these guys should be in the playoffs every single year."  So, no matter what happens this year, even an unlikely WS win, won't keep him from explaining just how bad things really are. 

    My question is, where was softlaw during the 86 year drought?  I mean, if we are currently cursed by a mindless FO and generally inept or underperforming players, what were Sox fans thinking way back when (before 2004)? 

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    You are insisting

    Probability based projection is not "insisting".

    Yes, April matters, but it takes more than April to matter when it comes to evaluating management.



    Making unequivocal statements about a team having no chance with no statistical analysis to backup the claim is most certainly not probability based projection.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ben, Admit you messed up and get rid of...

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    I have statistical evidence to back it up, in the form of the last 2 years of performances from everyday big contract profiles on the team.

    I'm happy that you are giddy, on April 30, 2013.

    The internet wasn't around, until Al Gore invented it back in the 90's.

    I've been a Red Sox fan since 1967, by virue of my Dad's love of Grove and Foxx and their sale to the Red Sox.

    Dan Duquette was the best GM the Red Sox ever had in the modern ear. He was and is quite competent in that role.



    Your giddiness over Duquette is puzzling.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share